As the news of Davante Adams wanting a trade broke early Tuesday afternoon, BMitch & Finlay only got a quick hit to react and the Junkies had to wait until Wednesday morning – and so, it was Wednesday where all six members of those two show panels got to give their takes on the possibility of Adams being dealt to Washington.
Here's what the Junkies had to say:
EB: “Not interested, sorry. He’s a great player, unbelievable the last six years. He’s already 32, he’s owed $35 million the next two years, and we don’t need him. He’s a great player, but why mess up the mojo? If he could stop the run, I’d sign him, but he’s an aging received owed a ton of money.
If it’s not going to hamstring us in the salary cap, we can talk, but yeah, I don’t think he’s coming here, and I don’t think we need him.”
Cakes: “His cap hit is $44.1 million the next two years, an aging wideout…I wouldn’t want to part with a second or third-round pick to get him. I have a hard time with the money and giving up a pick. Adam Peters can look at the landscape and say I can draft a receiver, that won’t help you this year, but you can have that player on a rookie deal for five years. Will it be a Davante Adams? Probably not, but it’s still going to be a good player.”
Bish was the devil’s advocate, trying to downplay the rest of the crew’s issues with an Adams trade, even if he seems like he might be on the fence depending on the parameters.
Bish: “Why wouldn’t you want Daniels throwing to Adams instead of Noah Brown? It’s not your money, and he can potentially make your offense better. They might not score 30 points a game all year. Maybe you could get the Raiders to cover some of the money, and I wouldn’t trade a first-rounder and would have to ponder a second-rounder, but a third-rounder, I have no problem with it. If you think they can make the playoffs, you wouldn’t want to add a player like Davante Adams for the playoffs? All that said, I don’t think he’s coming here.”
JP Flaim, though, seems to be the one who’d be all in, or mostly so.
JP: “If you can get him on the cheap, I'm not worried about the chemistry. If they win this week and they’re 4-1, go for it. Go strengthen your team. You have a team that can contend and make a run, and you can add a weapon like that? I understand it could affect the chemistry, there might be pressure on the quarterback to feed him.”
Okay, so Brian and JP Finlay, you’re up…and making it pretty close to a 106.7 The Fan consensus no.
BMitch: “Have you not noticed that every time someone becomes free or, or it seems to be available, we always want him? We still have the mindset of what we've had before: we’re always looking to sign a big name and never think about building something from the ground up the right way. People only think one way, and never think about the other side. What do you have to give up for it, at least a second and possibly more? If you have any angst about what you have to give up, you don’t do a deal. I’m tired of this idea that any time a name is available, we have to have him. I’ve listened to former quarterbacks discuss Jayden, and they say this kid gets it. Davante Adams don’t want you spreading the ball around, he wants 12 to 15 targets a game – does that affect the growth of your offense? Fans have the right to be fanatical, but Adam Peters understands he has to worry about the dynamics, and that's not the part of the team that needs to be enhanced right now.”